Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    July 5, 2015 11:30pm-12:01am PDT

11:30 pm
nd know what's going on we recommend a finding on the merits and i think staffs position has not changed that is their is it is in fairness to what people say it doesn't could kr0r7d with what the city attorney said there's a right to privacy it is triggered with the right to address information and that sort of thing a transitions a balancing test that is the key to determination is, you know, the individuals right to privacy and what the releases of the information on the funning of government we think that is placard the sfgovtv addressing the information we don't think that shows anything in terms of of the functioning governments and stronger standing that you know address the information didn't come into play when those
11:31 pm
are as i said and secondly, that our understanding is that essentially the gentleman is wanted the information so he could get the other people to sort of contact for lack of a better term to get that based on our ascertainment is consistent with the city attorney's office so that's why we recorded that. >> if i understood it with wasn't his complaint there was a waited for the slips and someone that was further counsel on the wait list got moved up and beyond why he needed
11:32 pm
anything about their contact information because somebody get moved up at the bottom and now at the top what more does he need i mean that's why it's - >> i think that is consistent with our position. >> yeah. >> any discussion yeah. >> just without recapping the whole thing we've had a pretty good discussion my thought at that time and still is someone apt boat slip from the city has it's a privilege they're seeking and they're in competition with other people that time boat slips if someone want to challenge whether or not it is appropriate for someone to jump offer others and get boat slip and find out something has been done improper they shouldn't
11:33 pm
have gotten that is like discovery in litigation even stronger the litigation since the person that didn't have any entitlement to it and the idea that the people who run the marina have this feeling they have to be protective of the rights of pifdz of people they give boat slips to i don't see that them as the guardian angels of the privacy rights someone wants to found out how much information in a boat slip and times to challenge is it they should have it raw i understand once again you get the slip that information becomes public your address and it is only the
11:34 pm
wait list when i don't understand if you have a water list it is chronological it is order who's at the tape and second and third and fourth and suddenly 6 comes up getting the slip i don't think you need you've got 6 names and addresses once they get the slip. >> i may not be remembering it correctly. >> i'm sorry. >> because i see and again my name is memory it is not - i esteemed to be remembering there was some information that appeared to be this is kind germane i could use it to see who my age chiej might be appropriate and all of a sudden the rec and park people sort of
11:35 pm
come in and is oh no, no wore to protect the privacy rights of those people and we don't want you to get this information and that struck he p me as appropriate maybe i'm over simplifying it maybe i am. >> mr. chair as i recall i remember a discussion that got for specific which was does the weigh lift constitute a contract for the folks on the wait list with the folks who have a contract with the marina and the name is public and needs to be shared and i'm not sure how what the determination was made internal but we had discussions in which case part of the discussion is - are we liable for giving away
11:36 pm
private information we really have in contact with those individuals i know there was a hint or at least the possibility of a suggestion this person is going to do something number 6 all of a sudden jumps to non-number one and you've got 4, 3, 2 , 1 and 2 that has no knowledge i suspect anyone that wants to ban together but the fact those folks i'm not sure held a relationship. >> i do your refresh my memory so that was that was a big part of it yeah. >> do i hear a motion. >> i move to accept the recommendation of staff. >> second. >> second.
11:37 pm
>> any public discussion. >> yeah. i know hearing none i'll >> i. >> opposed? . >> no. >> motion is kinder 4 to one. >> moving to number 7 discussion and possible action on executive director recruitment process i have reviewed the - well, let me first tell you as you'll recall following our main be that meeting we extended to june 5th formal additional proposals and we set a 1 o'clock
11:38 pm
deadline and as of without objection on june 5th no additional ones, however subsequent to that 1 o'clock deadline we did get a second proposal which had a essentially the same scope of work but had a proposal of $48,000 and in view of that i met with alliance and cattle after discussing with them that they should go ahead and ask the department of human services to do the necessary work to get a contract but in looking at the minutes i didn't see specification going back to
11:39 pm
june '57 the authorization for either myself or commissioner vice president andrews and myself as the committee to authorize entering into a contract with alliance so at this point, i'll propose that we be give that authorization. >> so moved. >> so moved. >> second. >> any deduction any public comment decision? hearing none i'll call the question>> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? here we go no nazi hearing none it is carried unanimously and in the course of meeting with alliance i indicated that they
11:40 pm
did satisfaction that we had and the public seemed to have the scope and description of the executive director position and noted that under their proposal that was the first one they were going to do to draft a profile of the candidates position consideration by the commission or the committee of the commission and they've agreed to do that i provided orally provided to them suggestions as to who they contacted in the pub in advance of their draft and we have 1086 scheduled a
11:41 pm
meeting of the subcommittee for the ninth of july at annunciations room 4 for public school input on the draft profile i will be i've not talked to the alliance since my meeting with them i'll be talking with her either tomorrow or the next day and to see where she is on the drafting and hopefully, we will have a draft for commissioner vice president andrews and i to consider by the end of the week or at tuesday at the certainly the last it needs to go out for public comment if there is push
11:42 pm
back at that time we will reschedule the july 9th meeting but hopefully, we can go forward timetable we will have the interested public input occupy the 9th make whatever changes or corrections or changed or adding annexes to that profile and go out by the middle of july with a thirty day window for response time and that we will then schedule a subcommittee meeting to consider the applications that have been received if their voluminous it maybe we'll ask alliance to do some i couldn't have done it
11:43 pm
without you out but for example only 10 we'll not all of them being brought to us and it will be contemplated we we will then commissioner vice president andrews and i will select out of the number of commitments maybe two or three we consider the top and then bring them to the full commission to consider and to reach a decision as to the hire so that the records should be clear that the actual determination as to who is going to be hired will be the total commission but that we will cut back to the assistance
11:44 pm
of the alliance or depending on the number as our proposal. >> commissioner hur. >> that is perfectly responsibly i'll only add you shouldn't be limited to a specific number if you think there are only 2 of the candidates that merit the consideration if i think there are 4 it's fine i'll give you has much as you need to do it appropriately. >> as instructors responded if we have 5 that all look equally as good we would present them all to you but the likelihood hopefully one or two will stand out. >> any other comments. >> yeah. >> i wanted to say as a point
11:45 pm
of progress last thursday i had an opportunity to meet with almost everyone on the ethics staff there's an opportunity to hear their thoughts and we spent the better part of if 2 and a half hours dough getting insight full information i'll be pointing out that memo together to get that to commissioner renne to make sure those thoughts and insights are considered as we go to develop the job. >> professional and personal characteristics for inputs needs to be i daresay we might have some fun it is an enjoyable exam passionate staff thank them for
11:46 pm
their time. >> thank you. >> let's turn to item 8 discussion and possible action regarding complaints received or initiated by the notification considering improper use of campaign fund one and two failure to report lobbying contacts and is there any public comment on those items if not i'll call for a vote on whether or not we should hold to in closed session. >> moved and seconded>> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> hearing none we'll go into
11:47 pm
>> is notification is back in public session and turn and do i need another motion do you hear a most whether or not to disclose or decisions in closed session. >> i recommend we not disclose any public comment call the question>> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> nancy pelosi's hearing none move to number 9 which is the approval of the minutes of the commission meeting of may 27th
11:48 pm
and june 5, 2015, any decision? any additions, deletions, or changes hearing none any decision seeing none entertain a motion >> move to approve > all in favor signify by i. > > opposed? >> carried their approved unanimously 10 discussion the executive director report and related matter and 3 highlights first on budget the board of supervisors budget economy lass list of add backs no additional funding for the ethics commission secondly two candidates have
11:49 pm
qualified for public financing in district 3 sxhooishgz and other candidate the told her for the mayors race is higher we'll take those candidates morning longer to reach and the last highlight i'll pout the translation of documents into the other languages. >> chair. >> commissioner renne. >> what additional funds did we ask for . >> an additional staffing of 2 positions and additional investor and more funding for the whole fund. >> is the decision not to
11:50 pm
approve that for the finance committee was the recommendation of the budget director of harvey rose office. >> heroess office no longer makes recommendations for analysis departments under $10 million he was not part of our process. >> anyone make any recommendations. >> no, no not for the smaller department. >> what did that happen. >> last year was the first or firefighter. >> what's the process of our trying to i mean who do you contact to try to smooth the way to getting increased funding. >> we talked to the marries budget office a specific analyst that makes the preliminary recommendations i also reach out budget director
11:51 pm
the supervisor of the staff and came back the members the board of supervisors finance committee and try to bum button hole them there was talk larry supervisor chiu had intentions of perhaps helping how fund advance and do pass, consent obviously he's not ton the board we lost one advocate in that direction and their all sympathetic but when they did the ad back process they are parochial concerns that's the priority. >> in regards to other departments you saw ink compatible not compatible but were the other departments treated pretty much the stairway someway or get additional money.
11:52 pm
>> no add backs for the smaller departments. >> the majority of them are for specific projects and the largest departments which is also where the ad back money comes from mr. mr. rose look at those to come out of the budget department. >> their tied to constituents who benefit that is yeah yeah. >> yeah. >> but if our constituencies rue. >> most of these them a fairly specific projects in the add backlist. >> so other 44 thousand is that what i'm looking for 2015-2016. >> yes. >> where are repudiating those conflict of interests. >> some of it will be absorbed we are trying to adjust salaries for long-term employees that are doing additional work and then we have one vacant position we
11:53 pm
have fined for outside ever our requests we're looking at and filling but possible with an upgraded responsibility that will require for funding. >> if there's no other questions the last highlight this is my last commission meeting. >> i want to thank the commission for this opportunity to serve it's been a heck of a ride for 11 years and i appreciate all of the commissioners that i'd be able to serve under and the work we've done i think we've made a lot of progress there is still a lot more work to do but i think we've had a lot of improvements in the last 11 years i'm glad i
11:54 pm
was part of it. >> you don't anticipate being that he august meeting. >> no, but before yourself. >> i have a lot of accumulated leave. >> you're going to be leaving the city. >> yes. going back to massachusetts to be close to any family and all likelihood going book e back teaching. >> you'll be in the office. >> yep. >> i want to thank you for your services and hopefully, we can find something between now and the first of august to be a little bit more- well, it's a
11:55 pm
problem if we have a function with all 5. >> yes. unfortunately. >> that's not possible so we'll have to. >> just by way of comment not if we don't discuss commission business it's not a meeting. >> if we don't talk about business. >> with that explanation. >> peppering i'd like to thank you for everything uss america pier 30/32 you've done i've served with you a long time it is not an easy job and you've weathered difficult storms well and appreciate the devotion you've given this job. >> thank you mr. sincroy. >> i had a bit of a birds eye internal verify spending time with the staff and in terms of
11:56 pm
the commission and for staffing structure and responsibility and the culture which was very clear the culture is very the new executive director will be stepping into a pretty solid culture that is supportive and very good work assignment and mr. sincroy received marks internally with the staff i just want to thank you for your leadership and jack, i wish you guarantee good luck in the future. >> item 11 items for future meetings. >> commissioner renne i will take up your i'm willing to take on the - and the whistle blower. >> the issues. >> i appreciate that.
11:57 pm
>> this will possible be for a closed session i wanted to discuss fog that we hold. >> i'm willing to have a discussion. >> me, too. >> that's what i'm looking for our complaint log wanted to discuss that. >> the utility functions of it. >> great over and above the fy. >> i think i asked you the question about it would be helpful to know the date they were filed and you pointed to something that shows the date. >> the case no. includes the date so the first two numbers -
11:58 pm
what? >> (inaudible). >> yeah. first numbers of the case number the second two digits with the year and then the most and day and. >> that's what i was trying to figure out that is the way you date them okay. >> just by way of background fixing the staff is working on a new database for tracking this one of the projects steven has a survey template and 75 percent of the way there wooech we're hoping by the end of the summer we'll launch that yeah steve and i have been working on it.
11:59 pm
>> my last point and thank you for the clear presentation that will be forth coming i don't know that you lead into it does something ever become a full case when does one make a decision does it say pending some things from 2011 and . >> i would say this is an item for the future meeting. >> fair enough fair enough i'm happy. >> do i hear a motion to adjourn. >> so moved. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> ong
12:00 am
commissioner wu commissioner antonini commissioner johnson commissioner moore and commissioner richards and expect commissioner hillis to arrive shortly commissioners, that places you under your is consideration of items proposed for continuance we had none, however, what i have received a request from the project sponsor and the dr requester is in agreement for a continuance of item 14 ab and items 15 ab for case cases at